Then I would do nothing. You can't be arrested. You have done nothing wrong at all. This guy probably realized he sold it for less than he should have, but that's his fault. He got his money, mailed the optic, then demanded more money. No judge in the land would say otherwise.

If it makes you feel better, don't take advice from a guy on the internet (me) just pay an attorney...but he literally is going to tell you the exact same thing.

Even if you had not sent any money, as far as the law is concerned, he shipped you the item. It's his fault. Would it be morally wrong? Yes. But the law would say it's his fault, and in this case, the Sheriff could seriously not care less to get involved

The only thing that would be counter to all of that is if you have a written agreement that says "ill send you the optic now, you pay me X dollars later" and you never paid the full amount of X

If that's not the case, then ignore him, let him try to scare someone else with his threats of the sheriff.

If he keeps harassing you, throw some fear tactics of your own tell him you're going to report him to the attorney general and the Federal Trade Commission

A debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:

(1) The use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person.

(2) The use of obscene or profane language or language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the hearer or reader.

(3) The publication of a list of consumers who allegedly refuse to pay debts, except to a consumer reporting agency or to persons meeting the requirements of section 603(f) or 604(3)1 of this Act.

(4) The advertisement for sale of any debt to coerce payment of the debt.

(5) Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.

(6) Except as provided in section 804, the placement of telephone calls without meaningful disclosure of the caller's identity.

§ 807. False or misleading representations [15 USC 1692e]

A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:

(1) The false representation or implication that the debt collector is vouched for, bonded by, or affiliated with the United States or any State, including the use of any badge, uniform, or facsimile thereof.

(2) The false representation of --

(A) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or

(B) any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by any debt collector for the collection of a debt.

(3) The false representation or implication that any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney.

(4) The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action.

(5) The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.

(6) The false representation or implication that a sale, referral, or other transfer of any interest in a debt shall cause the consumer to --

(A) lose any claim or defense to payment of the debt; or

(B) become subject to any practice prohibited by this title.

(7) The false representation or implication that the consumer committed any crime or other conduct in order to disgrace the consumer.

(8) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed.

(9) The use or distribution of any written communication which simulates or is falsely represented to be a document authorized, issued, or approved by any court, official, or agency of the United States or any State, or which creates a false impression as to its source, authorization, or approval.

(10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer.

(11) The failure to disclose in the initial written communication with the consumer and, in addition, if the initial communication with the consumer is oral, in that initial oral communication, that the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used for that purpose, and the failure to disclose in subsequent communications that the communication is from a debt collector, except that this paragraph shall not apply to a formal pleading made in connection with a legal action.

(12) The false representation or implication that accounts have been turned over to innocent purchasers for value.

(13) The false representation or implication that documents are legal process.

(14) The use of any business, company, or organization name other than the true name of the debt collector's business, company, or organization.

(15) The false representation or implication that documents are not legal process forms or do not require action by the consumer.

(16) The false representation or implication that a debt collector operates or is employed by a consumer reporting agency as defined by section 603(f) of this Act.

It's sort of a stretch to apply it to him, and not something like a collection agency, but he's probably too stupid to realize it. Fight fire with fire...and push come to shove, report him anyways...never know, FTC might just be itching for something to do.

__________________

VICTORY IS OURS
Because of members of THIS FORUM - Bass Pro Shops have reversed their anti-2nd Amendment policies on ammunition sales in the State of Illinois

On a website i found an aimpoint pro it was almost at retail price but i figured i could buy diectly so i had him ship it. I sent him the money via western union and it was the agreed amount but now he saying he wants more money. He also said if i dnt send it he will call the sheriffs office, now my questipn is what do i do. Ive already sent him what we agreed and if i sent him more id be paying more than retail this doesnt seem right to me so what should i do

You two didn't sign any papers, correct?

If you two didn't, tell him to **** off. You sent him money via Western Union, that is it.

The police will not get involved unless there was a legal signing between you two. He was stupid for sending the product first to begin with. All well.

Does your mom live with you? If so, there's an app for that... Very easy to pull a background check from your smartphone.

I'm not familiar with armslist, is it like gunbroker or eBay? If so, then it sounds like you DIDN'T buy it thru their "system"? So contacting them won't do a thing. What are we talking about in terms of money? If there's a serious number we're talking about the worse HE can do it sue you in small claims court. If you're in the right , you're in the right. Don't sweat it. If the guy is physically threatening you that's another story. IMO, that you HAVE TO
report to some authority. Other then that, he gonna call the Sheriff? Really and then what, is he gonna call Barney Fife?

Barney fife: "Let's get this film down to the lab at Mrs. Mason's drugstore."

Does your mom live with you? If so, there's an app for that... Very easy to pull a background check from your smartphone.

I'm not familiar with armslist, is it like gunbroker or eBay? If so, then it sounds like you DIDN'T buy it thru their "system"? So contacting them won't do a thing. What are we talking about in terms of money? If there's a serious number we're talking about the worse HE can do it sue you in small claims court. If you're in the right , you're in the right. Don't sweat it. If the guy is physically threatening you that's another story. IMO, that you HAVE TO
report to some authority. Other then that, he gonna call the Sheriff? Really and then what, is he gonna call Barney Fife?

Barney fife: "Let's get this film down to the lab at Mrs. Mason's drugstore."

It is like Craigslist but just for guns.

__________________
"Regardless of whether justified of not, you will feel sad about killing another human being. It is better to be sad than to be room temperature." - Joe B Fricks.

Then I would do nothing. You can't be arrested. You have done nothing wrong at all. This guy probably realized he sold it for less than he should have, but that's his fault. He got his money, mailed the optic, then demanded more money. No judge in the land would say otherwise.

If it makes you feel better, don't take advice from a guy on the internet (me) just pay an attorney...but he literally is going to tell you the exact same thing.

Even if you had not sent any money, as far as the law is concerned, he shipped you the item. It's his fault. Would it be morally wrong? Yes. But the law would say it's his fault, and in this case, the Sheriff could seriously not care less to get involved

The only thing that would be counter to all of that is if you have a written agreement that says "ill send you the optic now, you pay me X dollars later" and you never paid the full amount of X

If that's not the case, then ignore him, let him try to scare someone else with his threats of the sheriff.

If he keeps harassing you, throw some fear tactics of your own tell him you're going to report him to the attorney general and the Federal Trade Commission